Children's exposure to negative Internet content: effects of family context.

By Publication: Journal Date: Thursday, December 1 2005 Cheon, of Broadcasting & Hongsik Electronic Media John

The Internet has become an indispensable element of life for most people in the contemporary world, and children are not excluded. Because of the ubiquitous availability of Internet access, in schools and libraries, children are increasingly becoming involved in this new technology (Steyer & Clinton, 2003). As of December 2003, 23 million children in the United States ages 6 to 17 have Internet access at home, which is a threefold increase since 2000 (MediaPost, 2003). According to a survey conducted by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in July 2002, 78% of family households with children have Internet access at home. A survey by Yahoo and Carat showed that children ages 12 to 17 used the Internet an average of 16.7 hours per week in 2003 (Indiantelevision, 2003). Given this extensive usage, the Internet has the potential to be a very powerful socialization agent (Huston, Watkins, & Kunkel, 1989).

The Internet has a double-edged sword characteristic for children: providing many opportunities for learning (ParentLink, 2004; Wartella, Lee, & Caplovitz, 2002) while exposing children to potentially negative content (Finkelhor, Mitchell, & Wolak, 2000). The Internet not only provides significant benefits for children, such as research access, socialization, entertainment, and a communication tool with families, but it also connotes negative aspects such as violence, pornography, hate sites, isolation, predators, and commercialism (Media Awareness Network, 2003; National School Boards Foundation, 2003). The Web sites considered detrimental include those dedicated to negative content such as pornography, violent online games, online gambling, and so forth. For example, many children can easily access pornographic content on the Internet. They can also be accidentally exposed to numerous obscene pop-up banner ads and extensive pornographic content when they type seemingly innocent key words into a search engine, for example, the name of a singer such as Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, or Madonna (U.S. House of Representatives, 2001). According to Finkelhor et al., 25% of the respondents (n = 1,501, ages 10-17) reported receiving unwanted exposure to sexual materials while online, and 19% received a sexual solicitation online. Despite the potential negative effects on children using the Internet, more than 30% of surveyed parents had not discussed the downside of Internet use with their children (Internet Advisory Board, 2001), and 62% of parents of teenagers did not realize that their children had visited inappropriate Web sites (Yankelovich Partners, 1999). Recognizing the ever-serious negative aspects of children using the Internet and parents' possible underestimation of, or ignorance about, their children's Internet usage and its effects, this study explores the degree of children's exposure to negative Internet content and detects the possible discrepancy between what parents

think their children are doing online and their children's actual activities. In doing so, this study carefully dissects the possible causes and consequences of perceived parental control over children's Internet usage. Concerned that inappropriate Internet content may jeopardize the health or safety of children, the present study is a crucial attempt that aims to address the following research inquires with regard to children's Internet usage: (a) to understand the degree to which children are exposed to negative Internet content, (b) to detect a possible discrepancy between parents' perception and children's actual exposure to negative Internet content, (c) to examine various antecedents explaining perceived parental control over children's Internet usage, and (d) to suggest various ways to decrease children's exposure to negative Internet content. Literature Review In fall 2002, 99% of public schools in the United States had access to the Internet and 64% of children ages 5 to 17 had Internet access at home (National Center for Education Statistics, 2002). Children ages 13 to 17 spent more time online than watching television--3.5 hours versus 3.1 hours per day, and used the Internet mostly for exploration (surfing and searching), followed by education (learning and homework), multimedia (music, video, etc.), communications (e-mail, chat, and instant messages), games, and e-commerce (Corporation for Public Broadcasting, 2002). The place children were most likely to use the Internet was in the home, rather than at a library or school: 20% of children ages 8 to 16 had a computer in their bedroom, of which 54% had Internet access (Wartella et al., 2002). Negative Effects of Using the Internet There is an increasing concern from educators, psychologists, and parents about the negative effects of using the Internet on the physical (e.g., information fatigue syndrome), cognitive (e.g., inability to discriminate between the real and cyber world), and social development (e.g., identity confusion) of children (Cordes & Miller, 2000), among which, detriment to social development (hurting children's skills and patience to conduct necessary social relations in the real world) is a paramount problem (Affonso, 1999). One of the most serious concerns regarding children's social development involves the proliferation and easy accessibility of negative content on the Internet, such as pornography, violence, hate speech, gambling, sexual solicitation, and so forth (Internet Advisory Board, 2001; ParentLink, 2004). It is easy to see how these types of negative content harm children and destroy their development. Extant literature shows that children's exposure to inappropriate media content yields many negative outcomes such as increased aggression, fear, desensitization, poor school performance, prevalence of symptoms of psychological trauma, antisocial behavior, negative self-perception, low self-esteem, lack of reality, identity confusion, and more (e.g., Donnerstein, Slaby, & Eron, 1994; Fleming & Rickwood, 2001; Funk & Buchman, 1996; Strasburger & Donnerstein, 1999; Wartella, O'Keefe, & Scantlin, 2000). In particular, sexually explicit materials on the Internet can desensitize children to deviant sexual stimuli and encourage them to enact antisocial aggressive sexual behaviors (W. Fisher & Barak, 2001). Furthermore, the anonymity of the Internet makes it easier for pedophiles to approach children through online chatting. Children who spend hours in chat rooms looking for friends or just passing time can be easily targeted and abused by unknown adult sexual offenders (KidsHealth, 2004). Violent online games are another serious concern. It is known that violent

computer games increase children's physical, verbal, relational, and antisocial aggressions (Donnerstein et al., 1994). These negative effects of violent games on children are even more serious regarding the Internet because access to such violent games has become easier for unsupervised children due to free or fee-based online games (Collwell & Payne, 2000). Online gambling has also been cited as a serious Internet problem affecting children. It can seriously disrupt children's social and psychological development, for example, addiction, being unable to repay debts, missing school, and so forth (Ho, 2002; Mikta, 2001). However, little is known about children's actual amount of exposure to such inappropriate content and activities on the Internet. Extant literature shows that a discrepancy exists between the reports of parents and children on children's media usage; for example, parents tend to underestimate time spent on television viewing and the amount of violence to which children are exposed (Pearl, 1982; Strasburger & Donnerstein, 1999). This discrepancy leads parents to underrate the impact of media messages on their children and to not exert much control over their children's media use (Gentile & Walsh, 2002). Surprisingly, 38% of surveyed children ages 8 to 18 said that their parents do not enforce any rules on watching television, 95% of older children watch television without their parents, and 81% of children ages 2 to 7 watch television unsupervised (Roberts, Foehr, Rideout, & Brodie, 1999). This may be true for children's Internet usage, but we know little about the possible discrepancy between parental estimates and children's actual Internet usage. In this vein, the present study tries to detect the degree to which children are exposed to these sources of negative content and whether parents overestimate or underestimate their children's exposure to such content. In doing so, this study strives to examine how children's exposure to such negative Internet content relates to the social context of Internet usage, that is, the role of family communication and relationship on children's exposure to such content. Social Context of Children's Internet Use People use media within a social realm, and children are no exception. Social context of media usage, especially parental influence, is crucial in children's social development. However, many social aspects of children's Internet usage are still unknown. Therefore, this study focuses on the social context of children's Internet use, especially relative to family environment such as parental guidance, influence, and relationship with children. Children live within a family boundary; therefore, parental influence on children's media usage and effect is very important. Extant research shows that family communication exerts the greatest influence on children's socialization and development (McLeod & Chaffee, 1972; Moschis, 1985; O'Keefe, 1973). Stemming from political socialization research (Chaffee, McLeod, & Atkin, 1971), family communication patterns have been widely applied to various socialization contexts such as consumption, political process, media usage, and so forth. In particular, in mass media research, it was found that family communication patterns mediate the extent and type of children's mass media use and effects, for example, watching public affairs television programs (McLeod & Chaffee, 1972; Weintraub-Austin, 1993), interest in and knowledge about politics (Meadowcroft, 1986), imitating their parents' television usage (Chaffee et al., 1971), interpreting televised violence (Krcmar, 1998), attitude towards nontraditional sex roles (Corder-Bolz, 1980), child consumer learning (Churchill & Moschis, 1979; Moschis & Moore, 1982; Robertson, 1979), and so forth.

More specifically, concerning children's Internet usage, Wartella et al. (2000) found that parental attitude and guidance significantly influence children's judgment of quality Internet materials. Recognizing the importance of family context on children's Internet usage, the present study tries to examine the role of family context (parent-child communication, relationship, and activity) on children's exposure to Internet content and parents' control over children's Internet use. In short, the research contributes to this area in the following three aspects: (a) understanding children's actual Internet usage in terms of content, not by Web sites or general activities; (b) examining the role of family environment on children's negative Internet exposure; and (c) providing a theoretical framework to explain children's exposure to negative Internet content and parents' perceived control over their children's Internet usage. Hypotheses Model The first purpose of this study is to compare children's actual exposure to negative Internet content and parents' perception of their children's negative exposure, exploring the degree of discrepancy between the two. This study also examines whether children's exposure to negative Internet content varies with demographic variables such as family income, parents' education, and children's age and gender. Therefore, the two exploratory research questions for the study are as follows: [RQ.sub.1] : Is there any discrepancy or gap between children's actual exposure to negative Internet content and parents' perception of children's negative exposure? [RQ2.sub.:] Does children's exposure to negative Internet content vary with demographic variables such as family income, parents' education level, and children's age and gender? After answering the two research questions, the study builds a hypothesized model of children's exposure to negative Internet content and parental influences. More specifically, extending previous research on children's Internet usage and family context of media usage, this study proposes a hypothesized theoretical model that examines the relationship between family cohesion/intimacy, shared Web activities, parents' Internet knowledge and skill, parents' perceived control over children's Internet use, and children's exposure to negative Internet content (see Figure 1). Family Cohesion/Intimacy Family cohesion or intimacy is one of two basic dimensions of family relationships, along with power structure. It is defined as emotional connection among family members (Olson et al., 1983) or emotional links between parents and children (Emery, 1992). Previous studies demonstrate the importance of family cohesion or intimacy in children's socialization and development. For example, Powers (1988) found that high emotional cohesiveness or intimacy within a family significantly affects children's development of advanced moral judgment. In highly cohesive families, parents are the most influential source of moral authority and exert more control over their children's moral standards. This may be because a more cohesive and intimate relationship between parents and children makes it more likely that parents will have good communication with children, be more aware of children's attitudes and behaviors, and will thus perceive high control over children's behavior (White, 2000).

More specifically, regarding children's media-related behaviors, extant literature reveals the positive role of family cohesion on children's media consumption patterns and parental control. Highly cohesive families tend to have high internal connectedness through high family communication and encourage more nonmedia alternative family activities (e.g., leisure, outings, etc.), which are positively associated with decreased television viewing and increased parental monitoring, supervision, and control over children's media use (Dorr & Rabin, 1995; Gentile & Walsh, 2002; Pearl, 1982; Willits & Willits, 1986). Applying this to children's Internet use, it can be postulated that more cohesive parents tend to have high family communication, be more aware of children's behaviors, exert much control over children's Internet use, and thus perceive higher control: [H.sub.1]: Parents who feel higher intimacy with their children have greater perceived control over their children's Internet usage. Shared Web Activities/Co-Browsing Parent-child interactions or shared family activities are among the most salient forces in establishing and maintaining family relationships and boundaries (Zabriskie & McCormick, 2003). Shared activities are positively related to family functioning and communications (Shaw & Dawson, 2001). Parents with greater shared activities or positive interactions with their children are more likely to have better relationships with their children (Stafford & Canary, 1991) and, thus, are more aware of children's attitudes and behaviors (Olson et al., 1983). This may lead to high parental control over children's attitudes and behaviors, that is, more shared activities, better communication, and more control over children's behaviors (Holman & Jacquart, 1988; Orthner, 1975). In mass media research, a similar phenomenon is found, that is, the positive role of shared family interactions on children's television viewing behaviors such as viewing time, pattern, and effects (Krcmar, 1998). First, more shared family activities are associated with fewer television viewing hours (Willits & Willits, 1986). Second, children from families with more shared activities are less likely to watch television without parental supervision (Roberts, 2000). Extant literature also shows that shared family activities are correlated with positive media effects (Gentile & Walsh, 2002). In particular, when parents comment on and explain television programs for their children (shared media activities), their input results in more positive effects on children's television viewing behaviors. For example, shared television activities, or co-viewing, enhanced children's learning from educational programs (Collins, 1983) and increased children's comprehension of the characters and events depicted in television programs (Collins, Sobol, & Westly, 1981). Moreover, the effects of violent televised content on children were significantly minimized through parental television mediation (Corder-Bolz, 1980). Recently, Nathanson (2004) showed that parental mediation through evaluation of violent program characters yielded positive outcomes among children (e.g., negative attitude toward violent programs and characters, less likeliness to justify violence, and less involvement with violent programs). Family control orientation was also positively related to the degree of shared media activities, such as co-viewing and parental mediation (Chaffee & Tims, 1976).

Applying this positive role of shared media activities on children's media usage to the Internet context, it can be expected that high parent-child interaction (shared Web activity or co-browsing) makes it more likely that parents will have greater mediation and communication (discussion of Internet content), greater agreement on children's decision making (deciding which Web sites to see or not), and will thus perceive higher control over children's behaviors (perceived control over their children's Internet usage). Therefore, it can be postulated that greater shared Web activities may result in a greater level of perceived parental control over children's Internet usage. [H.sub.2]: Parents who engage in greater shared Web activities with their children have greater perceived control over their children's Internet usage. Internet Knowledge and Skill A new medium, like the Internet, usually requires a technical basis, namely "possession of knowledge or skill without which actual behavioral enactment is difficult or impossible" (J. D. Fisher & Fisher, 1992, p. 457). This technical skill and knowledge enhances a user's perceived control over the medium (Azjen, 1988). Skill, a Web user's "capacity for action during the online navigation process," has been known to influence the Internet user's online experience or "flow'--"an optimal, intrinsically enjoyable cognitive state experienced during online navigation" (Novak, Hoffman, & Yung, 2000, p. 24). It is believed that greater knowledge about, and skill at using, the Internet leads to greater perceived control during the Internet interaction. The role of skill and knowledge is also crucial in school-based children's education programs. The possession of good knowledge and skill in teaching content is essential for the success of every schoolteacher, especially for health-related and socially sensitive issues (Gingiss & Basen-Engquist, 1994). For example, teachers lacking adequate knowledge of HIV/AIDS could not effectively explain the disease or comfortably discuss related issues with students such as safer sex, disease transmission, symptoms, and so on (Dawson, Chunis, Smith, & Carboni, 2001). Despite the lack of studies on the role of parents' skill and knowledge on children's education, it can be assumed that parents with the necessary skill and knowledge concerning discussion topics might see themselves as competent in teaching their children about the topics, feel more comfortable discussing related issues, and perceive high control over children's related learning behaviors or adjustment. Similarly, in terms of parent-child interactions about and with the Internet, it can be assumed that parents with the necessary skill and knowledge concerning using the Internet may see themselves as competent in making judgments about, and exerting control over, their children's Internet usage (e.g., checking bookmarks and cache history, blocking inappropriate Internet content, etc.). Therefore, the following hypothesis is postulated: [H.sub.3]: Parents who have good skill and knowledge concerning the Internet have greater perceived control over their children's Internet usage. Perceived Parental Control and Children's Internet Usage Perceived parental control--parents' perception of their ability to successfully supervise and understand their children's Internet usage patterns and behaviors--can influence children's actual Internet usage. In other words, parents who have sophisticated Internet skill and knowledge, and have high intimacy and shared activities with their children, are expected to exert better control

over their children's Internet usage, which may result in more appropriate use of the Internet by their children. More specifically, the higher perceived control over children's Internet usage, the less children's exposure to negative Internet content. Therefore, the following hypothesis is postulated: [H.sub.4]: Greater parental perceived control over their children's Internet usage leads to less exposure to negative Internet content by their children. Method Sample Participating families were recruited through a developmental research school system associated with a large southeastern university. The school encompasses elementary, middle, and high school. It was determined that access through this school system was a good avenue for contacting a broad range of families, while cutting across social and demographic lines and including those families that still had children in the home. This school's student population is manipulated by the state to ensure impartial demographics with students from differing economic, racial, and ethnic backgrounds. Representing a cross section of the population in the area where the school is located, the school has 27% African American and 12.5% Hispanic students. Thirty-one percent of the students are drawn from families with an income below $25,000 a year. Children between the ages of 11 and 16 (6th to 10th grade) participated in the study, which assures that they have reached a cognitive level that provides the abstract thinking capacity required to complete the survey instrument. This allowed students to understand and interpret the survey question items (Zabriskie & McCormick, 2003). Procedure To recruit families for this study, the researchers first contacted the principal of the school. After getting permission from the principal and teachers at the school, permission (consent) was obtained from parents or guardians. For consenting families (student-parent pairs), the survey questionnaire was first administered to the parent (delivered home by the student) and then to the child (in school). The upper right corner of each pair of questionnaires (parent-child) was numbered and distributed in alphabetical order according to the students' last name (using the class roster) for each class. This was to ensure that each parent's survey form matched their child's form. When students returned their parents' consent and survey forms in sealed envelopes in class, the associated questionnaire (the same number as the specific parent) was given to the children and they were asked to fill out the questionnaire. The students were rewarded with candies and chocolates upon completing the questionnaire in class. One child was randomly selected if a parent had multiple children at the school. Of the 310 families initially contacted, 190 families participated in the survey. Measures and Instrument Five latent constructs are examined in this study: children's exposure to negative Internet content, parents' perceived control over children's Internet usage, family cohesion, shared Web activities, and Internet skill. Internet skill items were taken from Novak et al. (2000). All other question items were constructed by the researchers due to the lack of previously validated measures or an

adaptable preexisting scale in the literature. Accidental exposures ("accidentally exposed to") and intentional exposures ("likes to browse or participate in") were used to measure both parents' perception of children's exposure (e.g., "How often do you think your child is accidentally exposed/likes to browse ...") and children's actual exposure (e.g., "How much are you accidentally exposed/do you like to ..."). (1) Four types of negative Internet content or activities were illustrated in the questionnaire as follows: "violent online games (fighting, killing, or destroying things)," (2) "sexually explicit sites (romantic or dating information)," "online chatting with unknown persons (with unknown intentions)," (3) and "online gambling (using cyber or real money)." Seven-point semantic-differential scales, ranging from 1 (rarely) and 7 (very frequently), were used to measure accidental and intentional exposure. Either 7-point Likert or 7-point semantic-differential scales were used to measure all remaining constructs (parents' perceived control, family cohesion, shared Web activity, and Internet skill). Because most measurement items used in this study were constructed by the researchers, a fourstep measurement purification process was performed: (a) exploratory factor analysis to discover the items that deviate from the common core of items and to produce additional dimensions (Churchill, 1979), (b) confirmatory factor analysis for the final verification of unidimensionality (Gerbing & Anderson, 1988), (c) reliability test of the final scales, and (d) calculation of construct validity (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1995). First, through exploratory factor analyses, only one factor was kept for each construct due to either a small eigenvalue (slightly higher than 1) of the second factor or only one item belonging to the second factor (Hair et al., 1995). Second, through confirmatory factor analyses, nonsensical or theoretically inconsistent items that had large standard errors, standardized coefficients exceeding or very close to 1.0, or negative error variance were deleted. The results from first-order confirmatory factor models showed that the item-loading estimates on their factors were significant (p < .05; see Table 1). Goodness-of-fit indexes also demonstrated the quality of all models. The reliability coefficient alpha was higher than .70 for all five constructs. Finally, construct validity for each construct was calculated manually following Hair et al. (1995, p. 642), and the coefficients were all above the rule of .50. The final measurement items, purified through a series of factor analysis and used in the final structural equation analysis, are presented in Table 1. Results Participant Profile Of the 190 families participating in the survey, data from 178 families was usable for the final analysis after deleting cases with missing values for key study variables. (4) Among the 178 participating parents, 55 were fathers, 116 were mothers, and 7 were legal guardians. Parents and guardians ranged in age from 28 to 74 years, with a mean of 44.4. For participating children, 46.9% were male, and 53.1% were female, and their ages ranged from 11 to 16 years, with a mean of 13.04. Findings of Research Questions 1 and 2 A discrepancy was found between children's actual exposure to negative Internet content (violent online games, sexually explicit sites, online chatting with unknown persons, and online gambling)

and parents' perception of children's Internet exposure. Table 2 compares parents' perception of their children's negative Internet exposure with children's actual exposure. For accidental exposure, the mean of parents' perception of their children's accidental exposure to negative Internet content (M = 2.24) was lower than that of children's actual exposure (M = 2.57), t(177) = -3.75, p < .001. (5) The same was true for intentional exposure (M = 1.65 vs. 1.96),/(177) = -4.35, p < .001, and combined exposure (average of accidental and intentional; M = 1.94 vs. 2.27),/(177) = -4.60, p < .001. The relationship between children's exposure to negative Internet content and demographic variables was also examined. As shown in Table 3, male children (M = 2.26) are more likely to be intentionally exposed to negative Internet content than female children (M = 1.69), t(143.8) = 3.78, p < .05. However, there was no statistically significant mean difference between male and female children for accidental exposure (2.58 vs. 2.56), t(160) = 0.11, p > .05. Children's accidental and/or intentional exposure to negative Internet content is not related with other demographic variables such as family income, parents' education level, gender of parents, and age of children (p > .05). Model Testing Prior to the main hypothesis testing, several underlying assumptions were validated for structural equation modeling (normality, sampling adequacy, and no extreme multicollinearity; Hair et al., 1995), and the assumptions were confirmed to be within acceptable boundaries. (6) Four research hypotheses were tested, using structural equation analysis, by the method of maximum likelihood. AMOS 5 was used for performing data analyses. Figure 1 shows the visual description of the initial hypothesized model. Exogenous variables included family cohesion, shared Web activities, and Internet skill. Two endogenous variables included parents' perceived control over children's Internet usage and children's actual exposure to negative Internet content. Estimating goodnessof-fit for the hypothesized research model is the first step in model testing. In this study, the chisquare test is significant and suggests that the estimated model does not fit well with the observed data. However, the chi-square test is sensitive to sample size, and such a test frequently leads to model rejection. Therefore, Bentler and Bonnett (1980) suggested a chi-square/degrees of freedom ratio that does not exceed five indicates acceptable model fit (Bentler, 1989; Bollen, 1989), and this was estimated as 2.13 in the hypothesized model ([chi square] = 213.34, df = 100). Normed fit index (NFI) was .84, comparative fit index (CFI) was .91, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was .08, respectively. Based on these measures, it can be concluded that the model is acceptable despite the significant chi-square statistic. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] To improve the model, the significance of the regression weights was first examined, and all variables were significant (p < .05), except for parents' perceived control caused by Internet skill (p = .26). (7) This path was deleted in the revised model. Furthermore, modification indexes were used to identify any theoretically meaningful paths or relationships omitted in the original model. It was found that family cohesion is related to shared Web activity (p < .01), and therefore, the relationship was added to the revised model. Although this relationship was not hypothesized, much of the literature on shared family activity points out that family members in a high degree of family cohesion/intimacy tend to have high internal connectedness through high family

communication, encouraging inside interactions within the family boundary (Olson et al., 1983; Shaw & Dawson, 2001), and are more likely to view television programs together (Messaris & Kerr, 1983; Weintraub-Austin, 1993). Similarly, a recent study (Warren, 2003) shows that parents who are highly involved with children are more likely to mediate their children's television viewing. The revised model with the added path (family cohesion [right arrow] shared Web activity) and deleted path (Internet skill [right arrow] parents' perceived control) was tested (Figure 2), and the revised model was found to fit the data better than the original model ([chi square] = 65.69, df= 49, [chi square]/df ratio = 1.34, NFI = .99, CFI = .99, and RMSEA = .04). The significance of regression weights was examined for all constructs, and their associated measures and all relationships were significant at p < .05. The final model provides support for three of the four hypotheses (Hypotheses 1, 2, and 4). In support of Hypothesis 1, parents who feel higher intimacy with their children have greater perceived control over their children's Internet usage ([gamma] = .39, p < . 01). The degree to which parents engage in shared Web activities with their children was positively related to parents' perceived control over their children's Internet usage (Hypothesis 2: [gamma] = .43, p < .01), which in turn leads to decreased children's exposure to negative Internet content (Hypothesis 4: [gamma] = -.23, p < .05). In addition, a new causal relationship (family cohesion [right arrow] shared Web activity) emerged ([gamma] = .32, p < .01) in the model. [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] Discussion This study was an exploratory study to understand children's exposure to negative Internet content. The objective was to provide insight into family context factors that influence children's exposure to negative Internet content and to test their proposed interrelationships. In pursuing that goal, a theoretical model of children's negative Internet exposure was synthesized from the theoretical traditions of a representative body of diverse referent disciplines. Possible contributions of this study are threefold. First, it is the first attempt toward understanding children's negative Internet exposure in terms of content, rather than by Web sites or general activities. Second, this study builds a theoretical model explaining children's exposure to negative Internet content. Third, the study identifies the importance of family environment on children's negative Internet exposure and suggests two important family context variables that reduce children's exposure to negative content. This study found that parents generally underestimate their children's exposure to negative Internet content. This finding suggests that children are more exposed to negative Internet content than what parents expect. It implies that the effect of negative Internet content on children can be more serious than what most parents estimate. Moreover, among various demographic variables such as family income, parents' education level, and age and gender of children, only the gender of children is related to children's exposure to negative content (male children are exposed to negative content more than female children). This finding suggests that demographic variables do little to explain children's negative internet exposure, which amplifies the importance of identifying other significant factors that explain children's internet exposure. This study proposed family relationship, interaction, and control as important antecedents of children's exposure to

10

negative internet content and built a theoretical model on the effect of family context on children's negative exposure. The acceptable fit of the final model generally supports the stated hypotheses: Parents' perceived control is explained by shared Web activity and family cohesion, and perceived control results in more appropriate use of the Internet by their children (less exposure to negative internet content). As anticipated in Hypothesis 1, there was a significant effect of family cohesion/intimacy on parents' perceived control over children's internet usage. The result suggests that parents who perceive high family cohesion/intimacy tend to have high perceived control over their children's Internet usage. This finding implies that parents need to maintain intimate emotional bonding with their children to have better understanding of, and control over, their children's behaviors (negative internet exposure). The result is consistent with previous studies on the role of family cohesion on the parent-child relationship (Emery, 1992; Olson et al., 1983; Powers, 1988; White, 2000), and this study substantiates the importance of family cohesion in the context of children's negative internet exposure. As expected in Hypothesis 2, findings demonstrate a significant effect of shared Web activities on parents' perceived control over children's internet usage. The result implies that parents who spend more time online with their children are more likely to have high perceived control over their children's internet usage. The result is consistent with previous studies on the role of shared family activities on parent-child mutual understanding (Shaw & Dawson, 2001; Stafford & Canary, 1991) and children's media usage and learning (Collins, 1983; Collins et al., 1981; Corder-Bolz, 1980). This study further confirms the importance of shared family activities in the context of children's negative Internet exposure. Although not initially hypothesized, a new causal relationship (family cohesion [right arrow] shared Web activity) was discovered. This relationship seems conceptually sound because high emotional bonding among parents and children may lead to more shared activities and interactions between them. Actually, previous studies have demonstrated the positive relationship between family bonding and family interaction (Messaris & Kerr, 1983; Olson et al., 1983; Shaw & Dawson, 2001; Warren, 2003; Weintraub-Austin, 1993). Unexpectedly, however, the effect of parents' internet skill on perceived control over children's Internet usage was not confirmed. The hypothesized relationship (Hypothesis 3) was derived from "flow" research (more skill, higher cognitive control), but the result failed to show the importance of parents' internet skill on the perceived control over their children's Internet usage. The finding suggests that parents' Internet knowledge and skill do not necessarily give high competency and control to parents; instead, emotional bonding and shared Web activities contribute to increase parents' perceived control over children's Internet usage. In terms of relative importance, shared Web activity exhibited the strongest predicting power of parents' perceived control ([gamma] = . 43), followed by family cohesion ([gamma] = .39). The result suggests that the most important contributor of parents' perceived control over children's Internet usage is shared Web activities between parents and children. In addition, parents' perceived control led to decreased children's exposure to negative Internet content (Hypothesis 4). This suggests that parents' perceived control through shared Web activities and family cohesion actually reduces children's exposure to negative Internet content.

11

The findings of the present research provide substantial implications for child education in school and at home. This study suggests possible home education strategies to parents, for example, locating the computer in a common area and having regular shared Internet sessions, encouraging children to evaluate Web sites and Internet ads and commenting on and explaining the subjects, teaching quality Web browsing and clicking choices, building and maintaining family love, affirmation and intimate relationship with children, and so forth. Parental oversight and interaction through these home education strategies can help reduce the temptation for children to use the computer to explore inappropriate content. The results of the study also can help educational organizations and governmental agencies develop various workshops or educational programs for children and parents to teach quality Internet use and importance of family context in children's negative Internet exposure. The study also provides implications for government regulations regarding Web sites that are potentially negative to children, for example, the need for developing a universal rating system for inappropriate Internet content (such as early childhood, everyone, teen, mature, and adults only) and requiring the Web sites to post the rating to better inform children and parents about the content of the Web sites before they observe the content. Limitations and Future Research This study has several noted limitations. The first concern relates to sampling issues. First, the sample was relatively more upscale in terms of reported family income and parent education level than reflected in the sample school's general student population. (8) Second, the sample size of 178 was relatively small and was not a national sample. Third, the sample was limited to children ages 11 to 16. Therefore, it would be valuable to replicate the present study with a larger and more representative national sample including younger, more vulnerable children. Another concern is that the study employed self-reported measurement of children's Internet exposure without any actual observation of the children's behavior. Even though this study tried to address social desirability effects by assuring the anonymity of participants and employing accidental exposure, as well as intentional exposure, there is still a chance that social desirability may have factored into the responses. Hence, it would be fruitful to conduct an experiment that directly measures actual children's Internet exposure (e.g., log file analysis, surveillance software, etc.) by controlling social desirability effects. Similarly, for the measure of parents' control, it might be more valid to assess actual behavioral control, instead of perceived control, for example, how often parents intervene, monitor, filter, and/or supervise. In addition, the list of inappropriate Internet content could have been more exhaustive; for example, hate Web sites were not included. Hence, it would be useful to include a more exhaustive list of inappropriate content for future research. Last, Family communications patterns inventory could be another important indicator of parents' perceived control of their children's use of the Internet. Therefore, the relationship would be worthwhile for future study. In conclusion, this study has provided a theoretical framework for understanding the role of family environment on children's negative Internet exposure, such as family cohesion, shared Web activity, and parents' perceived control. The proposed model is an initial step in understanding the relationship between family context and children's exposure to negative Internet content. Theoretical approaches to understanding children's Internet exposure have rarely been conducted in previous literature, and this study was undertaken to guide future empirical research and

12

theoretical work. For example, the focus was on the family environment from the parents' perspective. It would be worthwhile to examine children's perspectives of family context, such as the role of children's Internet skill, children's perceived intimacy with their parents, children's perceived shared Web activities with their parents, and children's perceived control over Internet content. Second, this study only examined the role of family environment on children's negative Internet exposure. It should be noted that other social contexts might also be crucial in children's media usage. For example, children interact with other peer students outside family boundaries in school or other places. Children's exposure to negative content may be influenced by their interactions with other peer children. In addition, education in school on quality Internet usage may also significantly reduce children's negative Internet exposure. Therefore, as future research, it would be fruitful to examine the effects of peer interaction and school education on children's exposure to negative Internet content. References Affonso, B. (1999). Is the Internet affecting the social skills of our children? Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://www.sierrasource.com/cep612/internet.html Azjen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Chicago: Dorsey Press. Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS structural equations program manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software. Bentler, P. M., & Bonnett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley. Chaffee, S. H., McLeod, J. M., & Atkin, C. K. (1971). Parental influences on adolescent media use. American Behavioral Scientist, 14, 323-340. Chaffee, S. H., & Tims, A. R. (1976). Interpersonal factors in adolescent television use. Journal of Social Issues, 32(4), 98-115. Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 64-73. Churchill, G. A., & Moschis, G. P. (1979). Television and interpersonal influences on adolescent consumer learning. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(2), 23-35. Collins, W. A. (1983). Interpretation and inference in children's television Collins, W. A. (1983). Interpretation and inference in children's television viewing. In J. Bryant & D. R. Anderson (Eds.), Children's understanding of television (pp. 125-150). New York: Academic. Collins, W. A., Sobol, B. L., & Westly, S. (1981). Effects of adult commentary on children's comprehension and inferences about televised aggressive portrayal. Children Development, 52, 158-163. Collwell, J., & Payne, J. (2000). Negative correlates of computer game play in adolescents. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 295-310.

13

Corder-Bolz, C. R. (1980). Critical television viewing skills for elementary schools. Television and Children, 3(2), 34-39. Cordes, C., & Miller, E. (2000). Fool's gold: A critical look at computers in childhood. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/ computers/computers_reports_fools_old_contents.htm Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (2002). Connected to the future: A report on children "s Internet use. Retrieved August 26, 2004, from http://www.cpb.org/pdfs/ed/resources/connected/03_connect_report.pdf Dawson, L. J., Chunis, M. L., Smith, D. M., & Carboni, A. (2001). The role of academic discipline and gender in high school teachers' AIDS-related knowledge and attitudes. Journal of School Health, 71, 3-8. Donnerstein, E., Slaby, R. G., & Eron, L. D. (1994). The mass media and youth aggression. In L. D. Eron, J. H. Gentry, & P. Schlegel (Eds.), Reason to hope: A psychosocial perspective on violence and youth (pp. 219-250). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Dorr, A., & Rabin, B. E. (1995). Parents, children, and television. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (pp. 323-351). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Emery, R. E. (1992). Family conflict and its developmental implications: Aconceptual analysis of deep meaning and systemic processes. In C. U. Shantz & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), Conflict in child and adolescent development (pp. 270-297). London: Cambridge University Press. Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K. J., & Wolak, J. (2000). Online victimization: A report on the nation's youth. Retrieved August 25, 2004, from National Center for Missing and Exploited Children Web site: http://www.ncmec.com/ Fisher, J. D., & Fisher, W. A. (1992). Changing AIDS-risk behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 455-474. Fisher, W., & Barak, A. (2001). Internet pornography: A social psychological perspective on internet sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 312-323. Fleming, M. J., & Rickwood, D. J. (2001). Effects of violent versus nonviolent video games on children's arousal, aggressive mood, and positive mood. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 2047-2071. Funk, J. B., & Buchman, D. D. (1996). Playing violent video and computer games and adolescent self-concept. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 19-32. Gentile, D. A., & Walsh, D. A. (2002). A normative study of family media habits. Applied Development Psychology, 23, 157-178. Gerbing, D., & Anderson, J. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 186-192. Gingiss, R L., & Basen-Engquist, K. (1994). HIV education practices and training needs of middle school and high school teachers. Journal of School Health, 64(7), 290-295.

14

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Ho, D. (2002, June 27). Survey: Children have easy access to online gambling. Las Vegas Sun. Retrieved September 5, 2004, from http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2002/ jun/27/513640512.html?children%20online%20gambling Holman, T. B., & Jacquart, M. (1988). Leisure activity patterns and marital satisfaction: A further test. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 69-78. Huston, A. C., Watkins, B. A., & Kunkel, D. (1989). Public policy and children's television. American Psychologist, 44, 424-433. Indiantelevision. (2003). US youngsters hooked on to Net, TV say researchers. Retrieved September 5, 2004, from http://www.indiantelevision.com/headlines/y2k3/aug/aug124.htm Internet Advisory Board. (2001). Research of Internet downside issues. Retrieved September 4, 2004, from http://www.iab.ie/Publications/Research KidsHealth. (2004). Internet safety: Chat room caution. Retrieved September 4, 2004, from http://kidshealth.org/parent/firstaid_safe/home/net_safety_p2.html Krcmar, M. (1998). The contribution of family communication patterns to children interpretations of television violence. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42, 250-265. McLeod, J. M., & Chaffee, S. H. (1972). The construction of social reality. In J. T. Tiedeschi (Ed.), The social influences process (pp. 50-99), Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Meadowcroft, J. (1986). Family communication patterns and political development: The child's role. Communication Research, 13, 603-624. Media Awareness Network. (2003). Canada's children in a wired world: The parents" view. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://mypage.universe.ca/~rcmp/internet%20parents.pdf MediaPost. (2003, December 8). Two million American children have their own websites. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://www.centerformediaresearch.com/cfmr_briefArchive .cfm?s=228732 Messaris, P., & Kerr, D. (1983). Mothers' comments about TV: Relation to family communication patterns. Communication Research, 10, 175-194. Mikta, M. (2001, February 28). Win or lose, Internet gambling stakes are high. Medical News & Perspective, 285(8), 1005. Moschis, G. P. (1985). The role of family communication in consumer socialization of children and adolescents. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 898-913. Moschis, G. P., & Moore, R. L. (1982). A longitudinal study of television advertising effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 279-286. Nathanson, A. I. (2004). Factual and evaluative approaches to modifying children's responses to violent television. Journal of Communication, 54, 321-336.

15

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Internet access locations. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://nces.ed.gov/ssbr/pages/tableinternet.asp National School Boards Foundation. (2003). Research and guidelines for children's use of the Internet. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://www.nsbf.org/safe-smart/full-report.htm Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22-42. O'Keefe, G. J., Jr. (1973). Co-orientation variables in family studies. American Behavioral Scientist, 16, 513-536. Olson, D. H., McCubbin, H. I., Barnes, H., Larsen, A., Muxen, M., & Wilson, M. (1983). Families: What makes them work. Los Angeles: Sage. Orthner, D. K. (1975). Leisure activity patterns and marital satisfaction over the marital career. Journal of Marriage and Family, 37, 91-102. ParentLink. (2004). Children and the Internet. Retrieved September 10, 2004, from http://www .parentlink.act.gov.au/parentguides/parentg_childandinternet.htm Pearl, D. (1982). Television and behavior: Ten years of scientific progress and implications for the eighties (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: National Institute of Mental Health. Powers, S. I. (1988). Moral judgment development within the family. Journal of Moral Education, 17, 209-219. Roberts, D. F. (2000). Media and youth: Access, exposure, and privatization. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27(2), 8-14. Roberts, D. F., Foehr, U. G., Rideout, V. J., & Brodie, M. (1999). Kids and the media: Mediasaturated kids need parental involvement. Retrieved October 13, 2004, from http://www.kaisernetwork.org/aids/1999/11/kh991119.7.html Robertson, T. S. (1979). Parental mediation of television advertising effects. Journal of Communication, 29(4), 12-25. Shaw, S. M., & Dawson, D. (2001). Purposive leisure: Examining parental discourses on family activities. Leisure Sciences, 23, 217-231. Stafford, L., & Canary, D. J. (1991). Maintenance strategies and romantic relationship type, gender and relational characteristics. Journal of Social Personality Relation, 8, 217-242. Steyer, J. P., & Clinton, C. (2003). The other parent: The inside story of the media's effect on our children. New York: Atria Books. Strasburger, V. C., & Donnerstein, E. (1999). Children, adolescents, and the media: Issues and solutions. Pediatrics, 103, 129-139. U.S. House of Representatives. (2001, July 27). Children's access to pornography through Internet file-sharing programs. Prepared for Rep. Henry A. Waxman and Rep. Steve Largent, by Minority

16

Staff, Special Investigation Division, Committee on Government Reform. Retrieved October 9, 2004, from http:///www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20040817153928-98690.pdf Warren, R. (2003). Parental mediation of preschool children's television viewing. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47, 394-417. Wartella, E. A., Lee, J. H., & Caplovitz, A. G. (2002). Children and interactive media: Research compendium update. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://www.markle.org/downloadable_assets/cimcomp_update.pdf Wartella, E. A., O'Keefe, B., & Scantlin, R. (2000). Children and interactive media: A compendium of current research and directions for the future. Retrieved March 10, 2004, from http://www.markle.org/news/digital_kids.pdf Weintraub-Austin, E. (1993). Exploring the effects of active parental mediation of television content. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 37, 147-158. White, F. A. (2000). Relationship of family socialization processes to adolescent moral thought. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 75-91. Willits, W. L., & Willits, F. K. (1986). Adolescent participation in leisure activities: "The less, the more" or "the more, the more"? Leisure Sciences, 8, 189-206. Yankelovich Partners. (1999). A study of teens and their use of the Internet. Retrieved October 1, 2004, from http://www.websense.com/news/090799.htm Zabriskie, R. B., & McCormick, B. P. (2003). Parent and child perspectives of family leisure involvement and satisfaction with family life. Journal of Leisure Research, 35, 163-189. Notes (1) The reasons for measuring both accidental and intentional exposures are twofold. First, because the topic is highly sensitive (exposure to negative Internet content), it addresses social desirability effects by ensuring anonymity of participation and measuring both intentional and accidental exposure. Second, accidental exposure was related to the perceived parental control as explained by shared activities and family cohesion. The rationale is that children might learn, or have better knowledge for, reducing accidental exposure (e.g., blocking or closing inappropriate pop-up windows right away, not typing certain key words, screening negative content, and intentionally ignoring or avoiding content, etc.) through parental control, which is affected by interaction and communication between child and parents (shared Web activities and family cohesion). Accordingly, shared activities and family cohesion were hypothesized to be related to better parental control over children's exposure to negative content and should result in more appropriate and sophisticated use of the Internet by children (less intentional and accidental exposure to negative content). (2) There is a question about defining violent online games; different people might have different interpretations and understanding. In this work, violent online games are defined as "a cartoon, fantasy, or human character that must fight or destroy things in order to avoid being killed or

17

destroyed while trying to reach a goal, rescue someone, or escape from something" (Funk & Buchman, 1996, p. 24). (3) Although online chatting with unknown persons is not necessarily negative and children interact with (3) Although online chatting with unknown persons is not necessarily negative and children interact with other children they might not know online all the time, this study addresses an adultinitiated sexual solicitation or approach targeted at children via the Internet. According to Finkelhor et al. (2000), 19% of surveyed youths received a sexual solicitation on the Internet through online chatting. To address this concern, the phrase "online chatting with unknown adults with sexual intentions" was developed in the pilot test, but it was revised in the main survey to "online chatting with unknown persons (with unknown intentions)," because many adult offenders hide their identities and intentions when they approach children on the Internet, and it was illogical to ask about intentional exposure for this item ("likes to participate in online chatting with unknown adults with sexual intentions"). (4) Some children did not reveal their intentional exposure to negative Internet, so those cases were deleted. Meanwhile, it was decided to include cases with missing values in demographic variables (not the key variables used in the model testing) because a number of parents did not want to reveal their personal demographic information, especially on family income and education level. The researchers assume that this is especially true for the parents with low family income and/or low education level. They might have been afraid that their children would be discriminated against in school based on their family income and parents' education level. (5) Because the two research questions do not specify directions of effects (nondirectional), twotailed p values to determine statistical significance were used. (6) Skewness and kurosis values for each item were within the range of [+ (6) Skewness and kurosis values for each item were within the range of [+ or -] 1.96, Bartlett's test of sphericity index showed statistical significance (p < .01), variance inflation factors of three predictor variables are less than 10.0, tolerance scores of the variables are larger than .10, eigenvalues are larger than .01, and condition indexes are less than 100. (7) Because the four research hypotheses were one directional, one-tailed p values to determine statistical significance were used. (8) Although the school's general student population reflected a typical cross section of the broader population, the collected sample was relatively upscale. One possible explanation for this skewed sample would be that parents with a lower education level and lower income were not willing to provide their demographic information. There were approximately 30 cases with missing demographic data such as income and education level, and there is a probability that those cases are mostly from low-income and less-educated families. However, this is a just assumption, and thus, this study might not cover those who are at greater risk (less educated, low-income families). Therefore, caution is recommended in generalizing this study's findings to the broader population.

18

Chang-Hoan Cho (Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin) is an Assistant Professor of Advertising, College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida. His research interests include Internet advertising, new media technology, product placement, interactive television, multicultural advertising, and international advertising. Hongsik John Cheon (Ph.D., University of Florida) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Marketing and Finance, College of Business, Frostburg State University. His research interests include interactive marketing, international marketing, and consumer information processing.

Table 1 Constructs, Indicators, and Key Statistics Confirmatory Latent Variables Family cohesion Indicators I consider myself to be very close to my child (a) I respect my child's opinion (a) I like to spend as much of my spare time as I can with my child (a) I feel that I get along with my child (a) Index 6.30 0.73 Cronbach's [alpha] = .86 Parents' shared Web activities with the child I spend much time with my child in front of the computer (a) I share Web 4.24 1.69 .35 (c) 2.94 1.46 .49 (b) 6.45 0.94 .81 (c) 5.96 1.10 .41 (c) 6.41 0.81 .63 (c) M 6.40 SD 0.87 Factor Loadings 0.90 (b)

19

content or Web sites with my child (a) I help my child use the Internet or search Web content (a) Index 4.04 1.15 Cronbach's [alpha] = .72 Parents' Internet skill and knowledge I am skilled at using the Internet (a) I consider myself knowledgeable about the Internet (a) I know how to find what I am looking for on the Internet (a) How would I rate my skill at using the Internet, compared to a sport, game, hobby, or shopping I am best at? (d) Index Parents' perceived I know what Web content 5.05 5.07 1.24 1.40 Cronbach's [alpha] =.92 .65 (b) 4.58 1.44 .74 (c) 5.48 1.29 .81 (c) 5.02 1.32 .95 (c) 5.15 1.33 .97 (b) 4.95 1.55 .66 (c)

20

control over children's Internet usage

my child is exposed to (a) I know which Web sites my child usually browses (a) I control the Web content to which my child is exposed (a) Index 4.84 1.30 Cronbach's [alpha] = .83 4.35 1.84 .54 (c) 5.14 1.43 .88 (c)

Children's exposure to negative Internet content (violent online games, sexually explicit sites, online chatting with unknown persons, and online gambling)

How much are you accidentally exposed to or have you participated in the following Internet content or activities, even though you do not intend it (or through commercials)? (e) How much do you like to browse or participate

2.57

1.03

.65 (b)

1.96

0.93

.82 (f)

in the following Internet content or activities? (e)

21

Index

2.27

0.85

Cronbach's [alpha] = .79

(a) On a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). (b) Loading was set to 1.0 to fix construct variance. (c) Factor significance: p < .01. (d) On a scale from 1 (not skillful) to 7 (skillful). (e) On a scale from 1 (rarely) to 7 (very frequently). (Factor significance: p < .05. Table 2 Discrepancy Between Children's Actual Exposure to Negative Content and Parents' Perception of Their Children's Negative Internet Exposure M SD p (Two-Tailed)

Parents' perception of accidental exposure Children's actual accidental exposure Discrepancy (parent-children) Parents' perception of intentional exposure Children's actual intentional exposure Discrepancy (parent-children) Parents' perception (average of accidental and intentional) Children's actual exposure (average of accidental and intentional) Discrepancy (parentchildren) -0.32 0.94 2.27 0.85 1.94 0.86 t(177) = -4.60, p = .000 -0.31 0.96 1.96 0.93 1.65 0.75 t(177) = -4.35, p = .000 -0.33 1.18 2.57 1.03 2.24 0.96 t(177) = -3.75, p = .000

Note: Average of exposure to violent online games, sexually explicit sites, online chatting with unknown persons, and online gambling (each measured on a scale from 1 to 7).

22

Table 3 Children's Exposure to Negative Internet Content by Gender Intentional Exposure Gender Male Female N 76 86 M 2.26 1.69 SD 1.04 0.84 p (Two-Tailed) t(143.80) = 3.78, p = .000

Accidental Exposure Gender Male Female M 2.58 2.56 SD 1.09 1.07 p (Two-Tailed) t (160) = 0.11, p = .97

Note: Average of exposure to violent online games, sexually explicit sites, online chatting with unknown persons, and online gambling (each measured on a scale from 1 to 7).

23